n Compulaw - 1st Indigenous Digital Law Library
Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Opuiyo Vs. Omoniwari (2012) CLR 10(a) (SC)

Judgement delivered on October 12th 2012

Brief

  • Ownership of land
  • Ground of appeal

Facts

This appeal arose out of a land dispute between two families from Rivers State. The appellants (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiffs'), for and on behalf of the Amaso family of Ogoloma in Okrika, Rivers State; brought a suit at the Port-Harcourt High Court against the 1st respondent Johnson Omoniwari, now deceased (hereinafter referred to as the defendant) of Kinugbe family of Koroni Biri, Ogoloma claiming the following reliefs:

  • a
    "that the plaintiffs are entitled to the Statutory Right of Occupancy to all that piece or parcel of land situate at Amaso Compound of Ogbimebiri or Polo, Ogoloma which said land is more particularly delineated on Plan No. CTH.30 (L/D) and therein verged red.
  • b
    order of forfeiture of the Defendants use of the land and house granted to him without fee by plaintiffs ancestors.
  • c
    a perpetual injunction restraining the Defendants, their kinsmen, servants and agents from further interference' with the plaintiffs ownership and possession of the said land in dispute."

The plaintiffs' pleaded that the land in dispute, situate at Ogbikime Polo, in Ogoloma was first allocated to plaintiffs' ancestor Amaso. The land has since remained in the Amaso family through the descendants of their ancestor. The 1st defendant later sought the permission of one Oruta of Amaso family to reside in a house built on the land by Amaso. The permission was granted. A time came when the plaintiffs' family needed the house because of the expansion as a result of population growth within the plaintiffs' family. This imposed on the plaintiffs the necessity to ask the 1st defendant to quit the plaintiffs' land. The 1st defendant refused to quit and instead claimed the ownership of the land in dispute. The plaintiffs then sued claiming as earlier set out above. The defendants in their statement of defence denied that they belonged to Kinigbo family of Koromibiri, Ogoloma or that the land belonged to plaintiffs' ancestor Amaso.

The trial judge held that the plaintiffs' family has not been able to prove that they have a better title to the land in dispute than the defendant. So that their claim for the customary right of occupancy over the land fails and is hereby dismissed. Since the claim to customary right of occupancy fails the claim for forfeiture of defendant's use of the land and house also fails and is also hereby dismissed. The order of perpetual injunction must also fail and it is hereby dismissed. I accordingly hereby enter judgment for the defendant with costs assessed at N250.00"

The plaintiffs were dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial court and appealed.

The court below in its unanimous judgment dismissed the appeal. They have come before this court on a final appeal.

Issues

  • i
    Was there a miscarriage of justice to the fair and proper hearing of the...
    • Read More